Currently, I own the Rebel t2i with the 17-55, which fits my needs. However, I'd like to delve into FF. I am pretty much dead set on getting the Mark III. Question is whether I should get the body only or the kit. I currently own the 50 1.4, 85 1.8 and 135L. I mainly shoot indoor, low light type concerts but also bring it out for family events, vacations, walking around during the day type situations. For the low light shows, I don't really take many pictures of the actual show. During the performance, I'm usually video taping. The pictures come into play before and after when the artists need their pictures taken.
1) I was leaning towards the kit because I figure I can sell the 24-105 if I don't like it. I hear the lens is pretty decent all around but it's a slower lens so it probably won't work for my indoor, low light concerts. However, I do tend to use flash at these shows so maybe the fact that the lens is relatively slow won't matter at all since I have an available light source in the flash readily available.
2) On the other hand, I can just get the body and use my existing primes on the Mark III until the 24-70 II comes out. And I can keep my Rebel with the 17-55 and use two bodies for the concerts. Also, with this setup, I was thinking I could pick up a UWA/WA prime like the 24L II or 35L, or something versatile like the 16-35. Or maybe even take a chance and leave the 17-55 at home and use the 24L on the crop body and use the 85 or 135 on the FF. As I said before, I guess at these concerts, I'm taking more portraits of the artists and others more than the actual performance. And I know the traditional portrait range is like 70-135 or something like that. However, I feel that in an interior area, the portraits I take are usually in the 25-45 range, hence why I would use the 24L or 16-35L on a crop to take the portraits and the 85 or 135L on the FF for long-range type circumstances that might pop up.
Sorry for the long-winded post. Does this seem logical? What would other people do, especially low light concert photographers.
1) I was leaning towards the kit because I figure I can sell the 24-105 if I don't like it. I hear the lens is pretty decent all around but it's a slower lens so it probably won't work for my indoor, low light concerts. However, I do tend to use flash at these shows so maybe the fact that the lens is relatively slow won't matter at all since I have an available light source in the flash readily available.
2) On the other hand, I can just get the body and use my existing primes on the Mark III until the 24-70 II comes out. And I can keep my Rebel with the 17-55 and use two bodies for the concerts. Also, with this setup, I was thinking I could pick up a UWA/WA prime like the 24L II or 35L, or something versatile like the 16-35. Or maybe even take a chance and leave the 17-55 at home and use the 24L on the crop body and use the 85 or 135 on the FF. As I said before, I guess at these concerts, I'm taking more portraits of the artists and others more than the actual performance. And I know the traditional portrait range is like 70-135 or something like that. However, I feel that in an interior area, the portraits I take are usually in the 25-45 range, hence why I would use the 24L or 16-35L on a crop to take the portraits and the 85 or 135L on the FF for long-range type circumstances that might pop up.
Sorry for the long-winded post. Does this seem logical? What would other people do, especially low light concert photographers.
